← Back to context

Comment by brabel

5 hours ago

Can you think of why Russia may be taking those aggressive actions? Was the EU and the USA friendly towards Russia or you truly believe aggression was one sided?? Just one example: NATO has always been Europe’s defense against Russia, no one else was seen as the enemy until China became powerful enough to, which apparently cannot be tolerated. Russia was always wary of NATO including more countries and that was always a big reason for the difficulties in normalizing relations with the West. Yet the West made absolutely no attempt to calm the Russians down and for some reason announced in 2008 plans to expand to Georgia and Ukraine, despite even Western experts warning about that being utterly provocative. You know the result of that, but still consider there was no provocation at all , Russia just behaves like an arse for no reason , right?

> for some reason announced in 2008 plans to expand to Georgia and Ukraine

This was a G. W. Bush idea, during his last year in office, and it was never going to actually happen.

At the dinner on Wednesday, the German and French position was supported by Italy, Hungary and the Benelux countries, a senior German official said. Mr. Bush was said to have accepted that his position was not going to prevail,

https://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/03/world/europe/03nato.html

> Was the EU and the USA friendly towards Russia ...

When Russia annexed Crimea in 2014, did Angela Merkel stop the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, as very sensibly demanded by much of Eastern Europe? No, of course not - if we just trade more with Russia, they will be interested in peace! Germany deservedly lost billions finishing the construction, and it never transmitted a single ccm of gas.

> You know the result of that, but still consider there was no provocation at all

I think a better question to ask is, why do countries that border on Russia try so hard to become NATO members?

  • > it was never going to actually happen.

    That announcement is still on NATOs website to this day. To think it would never happen can only be seen as wishful thinking.

    > try so hard to become NATO members?

    If your intention is to align with the EU, it makes sense you want military protection against invasion in the future. Even Russia wanted at one point to join. The question is really why Russia should sit quietly while several countries around it join an alliance against it? Would the US be ok with Mexico and Canada doing that? Sounded ridiculous until a few months ago, now that is a sensible thing for them to seek. Look at how the US reacted to just a EV deal Canada made with China.

Sort of.

It’s not a secret that Ukraine is vital for the ground defence of Russia, but the Ukrainian people are pro-EU, and not from propaganda. You might well remember that their government was essentially a puppet for Russia until they were ousted. So if Ukraine is radicalised it is odd to think that its because of European propaganda- more likely they got tired of their masters.

I fully accept that Putin thinks of NATO as a threat to Russia, and NATO is at the door.

Its also entirely true that the border countries (Estonia for example) have major anxiety regarding a Russian invasion, and actively seek NATO membership to avoid that.

However, flying aircraft into sovereign territory (as Russia often did and continues to do to Sweden) is not the behaviour of a threatened country, they are the ones making the threats, constantly testing.

Their expansions into territory under the guise of “going where there are native Russians” will necessarily conclude with border regions being even more hostile to any native Russians wanting to settle. Again, in Estonia, the city of Narva is almost entirely native Russian; but they don’t want to be under Putin. Putins actions make Estonians wary of this fact and makes the Estonian government wish to integrate these people more instead of letting them live their lives.

In the Ukraine this was true too, thats why there was such a push to get people speaking Ukrainian, but Putin saw that his claim to the territory gets weaker over time and decided to invade.

If you understand the incentives of all involved, it is plain to see that Putin is the architect of his own misery here.

  • I can see that you understand some of the incentives. But how can you conclude that the West bears no responsibility? I am not biased either way since I am not natively from Europe or the US, but I do live in Europe. From my perspective, the west was pushing all buttons necessary to cause this tragedy, knowing too well what those buttons were from the Russians. Yes, I agree Putin had to shoot first for what happened next, but his alternative was to allow complete encroachment from hostile powers. Don’t tell me Europe and the US were not hostile before 2014. I talked to people back then, and always wondered why they couldn’t move on and stop openly calling for Russia to be excluded from deals, for nuclear weapons to be stationed near their borders, for their ships to not be allowed passage, and many many more things only a hostile nation would suggest. Now they feel vindicated and think they were right, failing to notice that perhaps if they hadn’t been so hostile, none of this would have happened in the first place!!

    Now, Greenland, as an example, would be wise to seek protection from the US, if we use the same logic, since it’s clearly being threatened, more clearly than the Baltic countries ever were by Russia since they joined NATO , at least. Imagine how the US would react if China was asked to help! Now, imagine Greenland actually had ties to the US going back several hundred years and a large population of “ethnic” Americans (bear with me). Would the US quietly sit while China initiated the process of establishing military presence in Greenland, at Greenlanders own request? Do you think they should, even if the current administration obviously wouldn’t entertain that for a second? Quite honestly, I think it would be foolish for the Americans to allow a sovereign nation near its borders to do something like that , and the Bay of Pigs conundrum shows that the US is not dumb and this will simply never happen. Now, the situation between Ukraine and Russia is not exactly the same , but if anything the incentive Russia has to prevent NATO there is even stronger than in the imaginary scenario I outlined above, I think that is as clear as anything can be in geopolitics.

Does NATO actually threaten Russia?

It threatens mobsters racket profits, but it will not start any actual fight.

  • Do you think openly saying any country that wants to join NATO, except the enemy, Russia, is welcome and will be accepted in due time, as they did with Georgia and Ukraine, and many others a decade earlier, despite USSR having left without blood the territories they had held since they obtained them after the bloodiest war in history, in which they came out victorious at enormous cost, does not constitute a threat? You can only think that if you buy the argument that NATO is purely for self defense, now and forever. Would you buy that argument if NATO ‘s guns were pointing directly at you? Even if you were right , is the risk you may be wrong acceptable when it comes to your national security?

> Yet the West made absolutely no attempt to calm the Russians down and for some reason announced in 2008 plans to expand to Georgia and Ukraine, despite even Western experts warning about that being utterly provocative.

It is the right of any sovereign country to freely join any military alliance, including NATO. The fact that this upsets Putin says more about him than the alliance and its (potential) members.

  • The US needs to start showing they actually believe that first by letting Cuba, several countries in South America, including Venezuela, and now even Greenland, freely choose who they ally with. Otherwise you’re just the same as Putin.

    • Greenland is a Danish territory, Denmark is already in NATO. Cuba is an ex-USSR ally, since USSR was sanctioned and that included allies, Cuba was sanctioned as well. Cuba is also sanctioned because of their own politics, similar to how Milosevic's Yugoslavia was.

      Russia is threatening a direct military invasion to present-day and potential future NATO and EU members. When has the EU done the same to any of your listed countries/territories? When have the US said they will invade a country for simply allying with Russia or the BRICS?

  • There is an interesting transcript of what Putin said to US President Bush in 2001.

    "Let me return to NATO enlargement. .... Russia is European and multi-ethnic. I can imagine us becoming allies. Only dire need could make us allied with others. Bit we feel left out of NATO. IF Russia is not part of this of course it feels left out. Why is NATO enlargement needed? In 1954 Russia applied to join NATO. I have the document. [ Bush: "that's interesting" ] NATO gave a negative answer with four specific reasons. Lack of an Austrian settlement. The totalitarian grip on Eastern Europe. And the need for Russia to cooperate with the UN disarmament process. Now all these conditions have been met.Perhaps Russia could be an ally."